Thursday, 30 June 2011

A real treat today. That will hopefully make you forgety I'm a day late. Export Mild, that's what we've got today.

In the glory years of British brewing, all sorts of beers were exported. Pale Ale we all know about. Porter and Stout, too. Scotch Ale and Burton ale. The whole set, pretty much. Including Mild Ale.

Pale Ale and Porter went to India. Stout went to teh West Indies. Australia got Pale Ale, Scotch Ale and Porter. But where did the Mild go? Some of it went to The Netherlands. I know that, because I've seen the newspaper adverts:

Algemeen Handelsblad, 01-11-1880

Het Nieuws van den Dag, 16-03-1880

Whitbread only brewed this beer for a relatively short period of time:1865 to 1880. I've no idea why they stopped brewing it . They never did produce that much of it. Maybe it wasn't worth the trouble. Though 1880 is a very significant date, being the year of the Free Mash Tun Act.

On to the beer itself. A bit of an odd beast. Whitbread discontinued the domestic equivalent in 1876. That had a similar gravity, but a much lower hopping rate. Just under 3 lbs a barrel compared to a bit over 6 lbs in XX Export. To be honest, it was more like Whitbread's KK than their XX. KK had around 4 lbs of hops per barrel.

What would I call this beer? Probably an Export Burton. There. That's another new style. I should get a job with the Brewers' Association.

That's it from me. Time for Kristen to set the controls for the heart of the sun . . . . . .

Kristen’s Version:

IngredientsGrist – This one is very simple and difficult at the same time. The grist calls for two different types of mild malt. Most people can only find one, if any at all. Seeing that this is the only malt in the entire beer, do your best to find some. If you haven’t used it before it’s a good place to see if you really like it as its 100% mild malt. I’m using a 50:50 mix of Paul’s mild malt Fawcett Mild Malt. If you can’t get any type of mild malt, use at least a malty pale malt like Optic or Cocktail. FYI – I tried using 100% Ashburne Mild. Blech. I could see maybe 25% but I don’t know even then… The invert No2 at ~15% really adds a lot of darker fruit depth and complexity without stomping all over the beer that No3 would do here. If you haven’t made No2 before, it’s the same technique and such for making the No3, just less molasses. If you can’t be bothered at least use some Golden Syrup…but be bothered.

Hops – This is a pretty gnarly beastie. Lots of hops, the vast majority being low alpha stuff. The Cluster are really the only ones that are higher. I’ve made this both with higher alpha Challenger at 105 and the Cluster and found the lower alpha stuff really adds to the amount of tannins and mouthfeel in the beer. The higher alpha just doesn’t have the same about of green matter going it. Goldings were the finishing hops as you can see. All very elegant and works beautifully well. You can really use any finishing hops that you’d like. One of the batches I did a mix of Falconers Flight and Pacifica and it turned out pretty marvelous.

Yeast – I put the Whitbread yeast in this recipe as it’s a Whitbread beer. I, for one, do not like it. Never have. I split one batch with Wyeast Thames Valley II and White Labs Australian Ale. I’ve always been a huge fan of the Thames Valley II but I have to say the Convicts really stole my attention. A great yeast that really emphasized the bready, toasty character of the mild malt without treading on the hops. I have my friend Aussie mate Peter Symons to thank for the suggestion but I’m sure he won’t remember with all the 4X he’s drank. ;) Thanks Peter!

Processes
Advanced Mash – The simple one step mash will do fine if in a rush. The higher dextrin content of the mild malt is really helped by a step mash as see below. The beer finishes a few points lower and much more crisp.

Wednesday, 29 June 2011

Lifting up stones on the interweb, I've found this little beastie. A snippet about Drogheda Ale. It was once very famous, apparently. Time has not been kind to its fame.

"On the Composition of Drogheda Ale, By Robert Simpson and John Mulligan, Students in the Evening Class for Practical Chemistry, Museum of Irish Industry.

[Read on Monday, January 20, 1862.]

The interesting results obtained by Messrs. Jackson and Wonfor in their analytical examination of Irish porter, induced us to undertake a similar examination of Drogheda ale, as this and the Porter" are the two beers which, are most consumed in Ireland, and they are also largely exported to other countries. No analysis of this ale having hitherto been published, we beg to lay before the Royal Dublin Society the results of our investigations.

As the time at our disposal would not permit us to examine more than one sample of ale, we selected that manufactured by Messrs. Cairnes as a specimen of all others. The sample which we analysed was of the description known as mild ale, and was obtained of Messrs. Weir and Co., through the Dublin Agent of Messrs. Cairnes.

The analysis was performed in the Laboratory of the Museum of Irish Industry, under the direction of Mr. Galloway. The mode of examination was precisely similar to that adopted by Messrs. Wonfor and Jackson in their analyses of the porter.

The results of the analysis show that the inorganic constituents are the same as those contained in the porter, and occur in about the same proportions; whilst the difference in the amount of spirit, sugar, and extractive matter, is very considerable, - the ale containing a much larger proportion of these substances: the porter, on the other hand, is richer in albuminous matter.

The two beers have different values as articles of diet, if the views most generally received of what constitutes nutritious and respiratory food be adopted. According to these views, the porter is the more valuable for the production of flesh, whilst the ale is richer in the substances which support respiration, and form fat."
"The Journal of the Royal Dublin society, Volume 3", 1862, pages 271 - 272.

There's then a very detailed analysis of Cairnes's Drogheda Ale. The full monty is a bit much even for me. I'll skip to the highlights:

Cairnes's Drogheda Ale 1862

I

II

Mean

Total amount of fixed organic matter

90.355

90.529

90.432

Total amount of fixed inorganic matter

94.375

94.71

94.61

Proof spirit

143

143

143

ABW

7.04

7.04

7.04

ABV

8.94

8.94

8.94

Acetic acid

3.75

4.09

3.91

Grape Sugar

15.062

15.062

15.062

Albumen

6.37

6.84

6.6

Extractive matter

68.903

68.627

68.875

Silica

0.186

0.189

0.187

Phosphate of Magnesia

0.753

0.753

0.753

Lime

0.087

0.088

0.087

Phosphoric acid

0.793

0.685

0.739

Chloride of sodium

0.381

0.375

0.378

Sulphuric acid

0.124

0.135

0.128

Potash

1.679

1.655

1.667

Soda

0.022

0.019

0.02

94.36

94.426

94.386

FG

1029.8

OG

1096.2

Source:

"The Journal of the Royal Dublin society, Volume 3", 1862, pages 276

The ABW and ABV are my own calculation, based on the proof spirit content. Proof spirit contained 49.25% alcohol by weight. The OG was given in the article. The FG I've calculated from OG and ABW.

I'm very happy to have found this. Of only because the Drogheda Ale is specifically called Mild Ale. That may not be important to you, but it is to me. I can now say for certain that Mild Ale was brewed in Ireland in the 19th century.

But it doesn't stop there. We've also learned more about the nature of Irish Mild. At least the Drogheda variety. For a start, it was pretty damn strong, almost 9% ABV. It was fairly well attenuated for the strength, around 70%. Fairly acidic, too. The lactic acid contents of the samples was 0.372% and 0.409%.

Do you know what Drogheda Ale reminds me of? Burton or Edinburgh Ale. So Irish Ale is really a form of Scotch Ale. That makes sense.

Tuesday, 28 June 2011

It wasn't me who said that, but an American visitor to London in the 1860's. As you'll see in a moment.

Yes, I've been down the Golden Cockerel allotment again and picked me a few veg. Not sure if they're cabbage or carrots. See what you think:

"IT IS AN UNDENIABLE FACT that the English are the greatest beer-drinking people in the world. The assertion may be disputed in favour of the Germans but who can compare the thin resinous beer of Munich and Vienna with the heavy bodied, soporific, and sinewy London Ale, Edinburgh Ale, or Guinness Brown Stout.

To believe in his native beer is a necessary part of the Englishman's religion. English literature and English poetry are full of beer and redolent of malt and hops, from Chaucer and Shakespeare down to the present day. Tom Jones, Roderick Random, the Spectator, the Tatler, the Guardian, Fielding, Hume, Smollett, Pope, Addison, Dryden, Goldsmith, and Samuel Johnson, never let slip a chance to prove the virtues and efficacy of beer, and 'Alf and 'Alf.

Barclay and Perkins, the brewers, employ a capital of £2,000,000 annually in their trade and 300 huge horses, brought from Flanders, at a cost of from £60 to £100 each. There are five partners in the house; the firm being worth £8,000,000, and the head brewer receives a salary of £2,000 a year.

The water used for brewing purposes is that of the Thames, pumped by a steam engine, on the same ground where Shakespeare's Globe Theatre stood three hundred years ago. One hundred and fifty thousand gallons of beer can be brewed from this water, daily, The malt is carried from barges at the riverside, by porters, and deposited in enormous bins, each of the height and depth of a three-storey house. Rats are fond of malt, but to keep them off a staff of sixty large cats are constantly employed on the premises and all these cats are under the supervision of a big-headed or chief cat, with a long moustache and Angola blood.

It is quite a sight to witness the anxious solicitude of this Chief Cat for the honour ofthe house of Barclay and Perkins, and for the discipline of his subordinate cats, the chief being a Thomas of the purest breed. In London it is calculated that about 6,500,000 barrels of ale, beer, and porter, are brewed annually, valued at about £20,000,000, and I think I am therefore correct in calling the English a beer-drinking people.

Everybody drinks beer in London. You can see labourers and dockmen sitting on benches outside of public houses, swilling what they call swipes, at two pence a pot. So if you drink at a Club you will see men as eminent as Mr. Bright, or Mr. Disraeli, calling for a 'pint of Bass' East India Ale' or 'a bottle of Stout' Even in workhouses beer is kept on tap and were the paupers to be deprived of their beer, they would, I believe, rise and annihilate their masters. A quart bottle of good beer or porter can be got anywhere in London for sixpence, and of all the beverages that I have ever tasted, I never found anything to equal in fragrance a drink of good London 'Brown Stout' on a warm summer day. A man may procure as much good beer as he can drink at a draught, for three pence, in London, at any public house or restaurant, and it is the common custom with the Cockneys to have it at every meal, and also between meals.

They have also a fashion in large parties among the working and middle classes, of ordering what is called a 'Queen Ann,' which is simply three pints of beer in a large, brightly burnished metal pot with a handle, and the man who calls for it having paid, takes a drink, then wipes the edges of the pot with the cuff of his coat-sleeve, to remove the foam from his lips—then passes it to his wife, sweetheart or his eldest child, who each in turn drink and wipe the edge of the measure; then it is passed to the stranger, and all around the board, each person being careful to wipe the 'pewter' in the same fashion. This custom seems rather strange and savage at the first sight to an American, but it is the custom of the country, and therefore cannot be quarrelled with.

Any foreigner passing through a London street which is inhabited by working men and their families, or in the neighbourhood of factories between twelve and one o'clock, or just after twelve, cannot fail to notice a sudden commotion and rush of adults and half naked children with jugs to the neighbouring beerhouses. All this large multitude are in quest of beer for the noon-day meal.

At noon and night the pot boys of the innumerable beer-shops may be seen carrying out die quarts and pints daily received by those families who do not choose to lay in a stock or store of their own beer, or the mothers and children of the same families, to whom the half-penny given to the pot boy is a matter of consequence, may be seen journeying to the beer-conduits themselves, and the drinking goes on from morning until night, among truckmen, coal heavers, street pavers, mechanics in the 'skittle grounds,' medical students in the hospitals, law students in the Inns of Court, and 'swells' in taverns.

From the gray of die morning until the hour of dark, you may see in the London streets those large drays, larger horses, huge draymen, and large casks of beer, ever present and never absent from the Londoner's eyes. Go down to the Strand, and you will see the same drays and Flemish horses emerging from the huge brewery gates, preparatory to carrying barrels of beer to tap-houses, and nine-gallon casks, the weekly allowance of a private London family to dwellinghouses.

A competent authority has estimated that each and every inhabitant of London wall drink, averaging young and old — 80 gallons of beer in the year. The population is 3,500,000. Therefore, Great is Beer, and Barclay and Perkins are its prophets.

An extract from 'Palace and Hovel' by Daniel Joseph Kirwan, by courtesy of the publishers, Abelard-Schuman Ltd., published at 21s. net."
"Golden Cockerel Vol.3 No.8 Summer 1964", pages 4 - 5. (The original book 'Palace and Hovel' by Daniel Joseph Kirwan, published 1870, pages 337 - 343.)

Love those old company propaganda mags. You should see the features about new pubs. Celebrations of formica and plywood.

I remember places like that. The Mermaid on our caravan site in Mablethorpe. A Tennant's pub. Looked just like the ones in the Golden Cockerel. Except it had electric metered pumps. The horizontal glass cylinder type. The Courage pubs, funnily enough, mostly featured rather natty counter-mounted sets of handpumps. Proper three-stumped wickets.

He's not right about Thames water being used for brewing, of course. They couldn't have used that filthy stuff. New River water or wells. That's what they really used.

"I never found anything to equal in fragrance a drink of good London 'Brown Stout' on a warm summer day." Well said, mate. Hot weather, strong Stout, marriage made in heaven. Good to have the support of the 19th century on that one.

A potato shaped like Charles de Gaulle's head. That'll be me next vegetable garden special.

Monday, 27 June 2011

The tied house system. It's been a vital part of the British pub trade for a long, long time. And disputes between brewer and tenant have been around just as long.

This is a court case from 1907. A tenant of Noakes and Co. refused to pay the extra shilling a barrel charged for beer as a result of a tax to help fund the Boer War. Let's see how far the tenant got with that one:

"1907 March 26

COZENS-FARDY, M.R. VAUGHAN WILLIAMS and BUCKLEY, L.JJ.

The plaintiffs were brewers and the lessors of a public-house known as the Hollydale Tavern at Peckham. The defendant was a licensed victualler, and the assignee of two leases of the same premises granted by the plaintiffs. The leases contained covenants by the lessees for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, that they would not during the term of the leases buy, receive, sell, or dispose of either directly or indirectly, or permit to be bought, received, sold, or disposed of either directly or indirectly, in or upon, out of, or about the said premises, or any part thereof, any porter, stout, beer, and ale other than such as should have been bona fide purchased of the lessors or of their successors in business.

Early in 1900, in consequence of the Boer war, an extra duty of 1s. a barrel (called the war tax) was imposed on beer. The principal London brewers met and agreed to put this extra 1s. a barrel on their customers, and in March, 1900, the plaintiffs sent a circular letter to all the tenants (including the defendant) of their tied houses in which they said: "You are doubtless aware that Her Majesty's Government have imposed a war tax on beer of 1s. a barrel, and we are consequently compelled to add this amount to the price of all our beer." For some time the plaintiffs supplied and the defendant paid for the beer at the increased price, but subsequently he refused to pay the extra 1s. a barrel, and in July, 1905, the plaintiffs sued him on a specially indorsed writ for 264l. 0s. 2d. , being the amount due from him for malt liquors supplied by them to him at the increased price.

By his defence the defendant admitted that the goods mentioned in the claim were sold and delivered by the plaintiffs to him in pursuance of the said covenant, and alleged that it was an implied term of the covenant that the plaintiffs would supply such porter, stout, beer, and ale as the defendant might buy or purchase from them at the fair market prices of the day, and that the prices claimed were not the fair market prices of the day for the said goods. Alternatively, he alleged that the prices claimed were unreasonable, unfair, and excessive.

The action came on for trial without a jury before Bray J. on April 28, 1906, when judgment was given for the plaintiffs. The defendant appealed.

The appeal was heard on March 26, 1907.

Montague Lush, K.C. , and W. O. Hodges , for the appellant.
English Harrison, K.C. , and Hansell , for the respondents.

COZENS-HARDY M.R. I think the view taken by the learned judge in this case was quite correct. The defendant Day is the occupier of a tied house. The tie is in the usual form with one exception, the tenant is bound - I am not giving the words, but merely the substance - to keep the house as a licensed house, and ie to do what he can to promote trade. That, of course, presupposes the necessity of securing for the house malt liquors, and then comes what is known as the tie. It is a covenant that no beer shall be consumed at the house except that which is bought from the plaintiffs, Messrs. Noakes and Co., Limited. There is no express provision by Noakes and Co., Limited, binding them to supply beer, still less is there any provision fixing the price at which beer is to be purchased, but Mr. English Harrison has argued the case with great fairness and in a manner which, whether it is right or wrong in point of law, is at least as favourable to the defendant as it can possibly be put. He assumes that there is an implied covenant by Messrs. Noakes and Co., Limited, that they will on the request of the defendant supply him with beer of drinkable and reasonable quality and at a reasonable price. Now I am clear that that implied covenant is not one which binds them to supply beer at the lowest possible market price. It must be at a reasonable price, and when we have evidence here that the price of beer at the date of the granting of the lease was 36s. a barrel, and that at the date when Day became assignee of the lease it was 33s. a barrel, and that subsequently the cost to the brewer was increased by the extra war tax of 1s. a barrel, it seems impossible to say that the charge of 34s. a barrel was not a reasonable charge. I should have come to that conclusion apart from any evidence, but when we find from the evidence given on behalf of the plaintiffs by the representatives of two breweries, one of them certainly a very large brewery, it is plain that the course taken by Messrs. Noakes and Co., Limited, is not a peculiar individual course taken by them in distinction from all other breweries, but is one which other breweries in a large way of business have thought themselves justified in taking. The New Westminster Brewery Company, all of whose houses are tied, have done exactly that which Messrs. Noakes and Co., Limited, did. The Cannon Brewery, which is a very large brewery, have done the same thing. Their houses are mostly tied houses, but with a certain proportion of free houses, that is to say, houses as to which there is no tie. It is said by Mr. Lush, "Oh yes, there are many houses in the full sense of the word free, but they are not free houses because they have obtained a loan from the brewers." In my opinion that is not really important to any point we have to decide here, and I see no ground for holding that there has been anything but a reasonable price charged for the beer. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

VAUGHAN WILLIAMS and BUCKLEY L.JJ. concurred."

Of course, the tenant had to pay up in the end. No surprise there.

I couldn't help looking at the numbers. 33s seems more than a fair price for a barrel of beer. I thought the going rate for standard Porter or Mild was 36s, pre-WW I. Not just in the years running up to 1914, but for several decades. I can't think why the tenant was so upset at having to pay 34s.

Let's look more closely at the amount the brewery demanded: 264 quid. Remember that the tenant was underpaying by a shilling a barrel. At 20 shillings to the pound, I make that 5,280 barrels. Assuming that's over 5 years, it comes to about 20 barrels a week. Which sounds about right. What amazes me is that Noakes supplied so much beer when they weren't being fully paid.

Maybe the tenant had picked the wrong man to represent him. Mr Lush - not a name that inspires confidence, is it?

Noakes and Co. were bought up by Courage in 1930. Which is why there are a few brewing records from them in the London metropolitan Archives. Which means . . . table time. Here are their beers from just a few years later (and before the effect of WW I):

Noakes and Co. beers in 1915

Year

Beer

Style

OG

FG

ABV

App. Atten-uation

lbs hops/ qtr

hops lb/brl

boil time (hours)

Pitch temp

dry hops (oz / barrel)

pale malt

brown malt

black malt

amber malt

crystal malt

no. 1 sugar

no. 3 sugar

CDM sugar

flaked maize

flaked rice

1915

DS

Stout

1074.8

1024.4

6.67

67.41%

2.54

0.88

1.5

1.5

1.5

62º

0.00

50.65%

3.83%

8.93%

10.13%

10.13%

11.26%

5.07%

1915

P

Porter

1038.8

1009.7

3.85

75.00%

2.54

0.46

1.5

1.5

1.5

61º

0.00

50.65%

3.83%

8.93%

10.13%

10.13%

11.26%

5.07%

1915

X

Mild

1044.9

1010.5

4.54

76.54%

2.59

0.48

1.5

1.5

1.5

63º

0.00

64.35%

0.00%

0.51%

4.69%

29.05%

0.89%

1915

DS

Stout

1074.8

1027.1

6.30

63.70%

4.00

1.38

1.5

1.5

1.5

61.5º

0.00

47.66%

4.00%

8.81%

9.53%

9.53%

14.12%

6.35%

1915

P

Porter

1041.6

1010.8

4.07

74.00%

4.00

0.77

1.5

1.5

1.5

62º

0.00

47.66%

4.00%

8.81%

9.53%

9.53%

14.12%

6.35%

1915

LBA

Pale Ale

1045.2

1011.4

4.47

74.85%

9.53

2.02

2

2

61º

7.45

62.11%

24.84%

12.42%

0.62%

1915

X

Mild

1047.1

1009.7

4.95

79.41%

2.72

0.59

1.5

1.5

56.5º

0.00

60.65%

0.82%

4.33%

32.49%

1.44%

0.27%

1915

X

Mild

1039.3

1008.9

4.03

77.46%

2.72

0.49

1.5

1.5

56.5º

0.00

60.65%

0.82%

4.33%

32.49%

1.44%

0.27%

1915

DS

Stout

1073.4

1026.6

6.19

63.77%

3.13

1.06

1.5

1.5

1.5

61º

0.00

47.82%

3.93%

9.43%

9.36%

9.36%

13.86%

6.24%

1915

P

Porter

1041.3

1012.2

3.85

70.47%

3.13

0.59

1.5

1.5

1.5

62º

0.00

47.82%

3.93%

9.43%

9.36%

9.36%

13.86%

6.24%

1915

XB

Pale Ale

1055.4

1008.0

6.27

85.50%

14.68

4.44

2.5

56º

8.04

64.76%

13.49%

20.24%

1.52%

1915

XXX

Strong Ale

1077.0

1029.9

6.23

61.15%

12.60

4.23

56.5º

8.00

79.07%

1.49%

4.94%

13.18%

1.32%

1915

DS

Stout

1074.2

1027.7

6.16

62.69%

2.09

0.83

1.5

1.5

61º

0.00

53.51%

3.68%

5.52%

4.86%

4.86%

21.89%

5.68%

1915

P

Porter

1046.5

1012.7

4.47

72.62%

2.09

0.52

1.5

1.5

61º

0.00

53.51%

3.68%

5.52%

4.86%

4.86%

21.89%

5.68%

Source:

Noakes brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives document ACC/2305/17/34